RE: Valkyrie6 May 2022 11:50
https://www.ft.com/content/65db532e-5c72-4e94-88a8-cf34e7c48fe0
Strider's comments are spot on once again:
"A nicely written article, thanks. May I add two thoughts. First, I think that although Mr Stroll (and Mr Moers) brought many excellent strategies, the former's desire to go head to head with Ferrari, one of the most dominant global luxury brands, is dripping with cost and risk. Aston Martin had a perfect and almost unique positioning: the luxury sports GT, a bespoke 911++ available in comfort, sports or super-sports flavours, the car James Bond drives because it's a gentleman's car.
My second point is about engines. Of course, bespoke engines would add some value, but they'd also create enormous costs and risk, not just in their development and manufacture but also in their servicing and though-life parts supply. McLaren buys in engines designed and manufactured by Ricardo, but no one really cares. Pagani, whose cars are in a super luxury territory way above Aston Martin, also buys in its engines, yet manage to make that feel reassuring rather than compromising. Lamborghini engines are heavily based on Audi designs. It's easy for the keyboard critics to grumble about the AMG engines, but they are actually brilliant engines, and cheaper and more reliable and better supported than could be achieved with in-house designs."
I agree, the cost and risk of the business both just ramped up quite considerably.
In house? How long ago was Stroll saying every small manufacturer needs a big brother? 3 months ago?
Deluded fool, lurching from one shambles to the next.
So, the year ahead has a court case which could result in a loss of almost £200m, burning through a minimum of £150m in cash, at the same time they are changing to in house designs which are more expensive etc.
Cash raise or bankruptcy within 2 years.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
